4.6 Article

Modeling and implementation of tandem polymer solar cells using wide-bandgap front cells

期刊

CARBON ENERGY
卷 2, 期 1, 页码 131-142

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cey2.20

关键词

polymer solar cells; solar cells; tandem solar cells

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [2017R1C1B1010627]
  2. New and Renewable Energy Program of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) - Korea Government Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MTIE) [20163030013900, 20183010013900]
  3. Technology Development Program to solve climate changes of the National Research Foundation (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning [NRF-2015M1A2A2057506, 2019M1A2A2065614]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tandem device architectures offer a route to greatly increase the maximum possible power conversion efficiencies (PCEs) of polymer solar cells, however, the complexity of tandem cell device fabrication (such as selecting bandgaps of the front and back cells, current matching, thickness, and recombination layer optimization) often result in lower PCEs than are observed in single-junction devices. In this study, we analyze the influence of front cell and back cell bandgaps and use transfer matrix modeling to rationally design and optimize effective tandem solar cell structures before actual device fabrication. Our approach allows us to estimate tandem device parameters based on known absorption coefficients and open-circuit voltages of different active layer materials and design devices without wasting valuable time and materials. Using this approach, we have investigated a series of wide bandgap, high voltage photovoltaic polymers as front cells in tandem devices with PTB7-Th as a back cell. In this way, we have been able to demonstrate tandem devices with PCE of up to 12.8% with minimal consumption of valuable photoactive materials in tandem device optimization. This value represents one of the highest PCE values to date for fullerene-based tandem solar cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据